What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Starting Seneca Wallace! Who's With Me? (1 Viewer)

Let's hope this week starts a hype train thread on Seneca, yes I also look to be starting him but I expect a decent showing this week :bag:

 
Lol he is not going to be even close to Rodgers. He couldn't even fill in that well for Hasselbeck on the seahawks in the prime of his career(Wallace's career that is)

 
I think Green Bay's going to rely quite heavily on the ground game and do whatever they can to prevent Wallace from having to heave it 35 + times.

 
I'm starting him in 2 leagues. Both start 2qb. Both where I have Rodgers. So I'm a bit desperate.

 
Starting him in a deep dynasty where I had Rodgers and Freeman. He's all that was left on waivers after Rodgers went down.

 
I have no choice... wanted to start McCown but noooo, Cutler says he's ok to start :rant: :rant:

Glennon, Palmer and Manuel are also on waiver...

 
Sir Psycho said:
I have no choice... wanted to start McCown but noooo, Cutler says he's ok to start :rant: :rant:

Glennon, Palmer and Manuel are also on waiver...
Click to expand...
i actually have cutler and mccown but I just need to wait and see on cutler...I have a hard time thinking he won't exit at some point if he is just not effective or hurt.
 
Eagles D week 10 not the same as Eagles D in week 5. Much improved. Not saying he will be horrible but don't expect a bonanza of points.

Bonanza = over 2 TD and 300 yards

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sir Psycho said:
I have no choice... wanted to start McCown but noooo, Cutler says he's ok to start :rant: :rant:

Glennon, Palmer and Manuel are also on waiver...
Click to expand...
Same exact boat as you minus Palmer. I've been going back and forth between Wallace and Glennon. Part of me wants to start Glennon on MNF against a MIA team that seems like it's about to implode yet I can't disregard how good they've been vs. the QB this year.

Honestly, the O/U for the GB/PHI game is around 47 which will likely sway me towards Wallace.

####ty situation regardless.

 
Man of Zen said:
I dunno. How'd it work out for fantasy owners the last time GB had to plug a backup QB in there for a whole game?
Click to expand...
Except you have to go back to 2010 to get 6 total passing touchdowns for Wallace, you have to go back to 2008 to find the last time Wallace threw 6 touchdowns in a year,

 
msudaisy26 said:
Man of Zen said:
I dunno. How'd it work out for fantasy owners the last time GB had to plug a backup QB in there for a whole game?
Click to expand...
Except you have to go back to 2010 to get 6 total passing touchdowns for Wallace, you have to go back to 2008 to find the last time Wallace threw 6 touchdowns in a year,
Click to expand...
He's 6-15 as a starter. Just above Brady Quinn and Blaine Gabbert. Sounds about right.

 
moondog said:
msudaisy26 said:
Man of Zen said:
I dunno. How'd it work out for fantasy owners the last time GB had to plug a backup QB in there for a whole game?
Click to expand...
Except you have to go back to 2010 to get 6 total passing touchdowns for Wallace, you have to go back to 2008 to find the last time Wallace threw 6 touchdowns in a year,
Click to expand...
He's 6-15 as a starter. Just above Brady Quinn and Blaine Gabbert. Sounds about right.
Click to expand...
Yuck... Good luck to anyone unfortunate enough to have to start Wallace.

 
I used to think the Pack had a quality backup. After last week I feel gut punched. Rodgers down and the backup was tossing it into the dirt.

 
Ive had to endure Wallace before when he was at the Hawks. Just not believable as a QB.

Somewhere I think someone in the organization decided to prove they were a genius at developing QBs. Cant imagine who that would have been.

Back to the point and I have to start him or Manuel this week having lost Rodgers and Bradford. Leaning towards him and hoping for garbage time stats. Manuel next week then it is bye time in week 12. Oof.

 
Area51Inhabitant said:
I think Green Bay's going to rely quite heavily on the ground game and do whatever they can to prevent Wallace from having to heave it 35 + times.
Click to expand...
the other rook fumbles too much and hasn't played(or done much) since his last one. I don't think they can do this effectively.

I like Franklin, but few RBs have ever lived in a coach's doghouse as much as him.

 
scothawk said:
Ive had to endure Wallace before when he was at the Hawks. Just not believable as a QB.

Somewhere I think someone in the organization decided to prove they were a genius at developing QBs. Cant imagine who that would have been.

Back to the point and I have to start him or Manuel this week having lost Rodgers and Bradford. Leaning towards him and hoping for garbage time stats. Manuel next week then it is bye time in week 12. Oof.
Click to expand...
Eli Manning has been getting me 13 points and been yuck most of this year whenever I go away from Brady who has been pretty hard to predict and struggling a lot this year too. For me, I think Wallace can get more than 13 points.

Eli should get a plenty of points each week with that WR corps and I'm frustrated trying to explain his lack of success.

Seneca is playing the worst pass defense so I'm begrudgingly leaning toward him. I'm not sure if I have the nerve...today I say that.

 
Touchdown There said:
I used to think the Pack had a quality backup. After last week I feel gut punched. Rodgers down and the backup was tossing it into the dirt.
Click to expand...
Wallace about pulled a Favre-retired, no he didn't retire and signed with the Pack. 49ers were said to be releasing him as he was 4th but...it was odd.

I think in late August/early September when teams usually pickup other teams cuts, teams are unreasonable about the quality of their backup QBs now. Some coach put time in all summer and...so what. If he's not the best backup you can have, then he's not. Why isn't preseason used to judge backup QBs anymore?

Titans have Rusty as their third stringer-he stunk when he started years back and he stinks in preseason. Why keep him?

The Rams have Clemens who i don't like but maybe he is ok. They signed Brady Quinn and re-signed Davis who they had in camp.

Going on some articles, which is opinion of some writers....Vince Young and Seneca were able to walk onto the Pack and be the best backup they had, that day.

Quite candidly, I'd rather ANY successful college QB who didn't get a shot in the NFL than these guys. Pick a name, I'll support him. It would breed more hope than starting some backup where we hope every single previous game was an aberration and somehow he's a good QB now.

Look at the Bills this year. Win or not, it looks fun and is entertaining.

It "kills me" how the backup steals all hope from an entire organization.

 
Bri said:
Touchdown There said:
I used to think the Pack had a quality backup. After last week I feel gut punched. Rodgers down and the backup was tossing it into the dirt.
Click to expand...
Wallace about pulled a Favre-retired, no he didn't retire and signed with the Pack. 49ers were said to be releasing him as he was 4th but...it was odd.

I think in late August/early September when teams usually pickup other teams cuts, teams are unreasonable about the quality of their backup QBs now. Some coach put time in all summer and...so what. If he's not the best backup you can have, then he's not. Why isn't preseason used to judge backup QBs anymore?

Titans have Rusty as their third stringer-he stunk when he started years back and he stinks in preseason. Why keep him?

The Rams have Clemens who i don't like but maybe he is ok. They signed Brady Quinn and re-signed Davis who they had in camp.

Going on some articles, which is opinion of some writers....Vince Young and Seneca were able to walk onto the Pack and be the best backup they had, that day.

Quite candidly, I'd rather ANY successful college QB who didn't get a shot in the NFL than these guys. Pick a name, I'll support him. It would breed more hope than starting some backup where we hope every single previous game was an aberration and somehow he's a good QB now.

Look at the Bills this year. Win or not, it looks fun and is entertaining.

It "kills me" how the backup steals all hope from an entire organization.
Click to expand...
The problem with carrying a quality backup QB is that they cost a lot of money that could be spent on starters. And the reality is that there aren't even enough quality starting QBs to go around. So if you have a Manning, Brees, or Rodgers it really doesn't make sense to carry an expensive backup. You would be better off spending on better lineman to protect them.

 
TwinTurbo said:
Bri said:
Touchdown There said:
I used to think the Pack had a quality backup. After last week I feel gut punched. Rodgers down and the backup was tossing it into the dirt.
Click to expand...
Wallace about pulled a Favre-retired, no he didn't retire and signed with the Pack. 49ers were said to be releasing him as he was 4th but...it was odd.

I think in late August/early September when teams usually pickup other teams cuts, teams are unreasonable about the quality of their backup QBs now. Some coach put time in all summer and...so what. If he's not the best backup you can have, then he's not. Why isn't preseason used to judge backup QBs anymore?

Titans have Rusty as their third stringer-he stunk when he started years back and he stinks in preseason. Why keep him?

The Rams have Clemens who i don't like but maybe he is ok. They signed Brady Quinn and re-signed Davis who they had in camp.

Going on some articles, which is opinion of some writers....Vince Young and Seneca were able to walk onto the Pack and be the best backup they had, that day.

Quite candidly, I'd rather ANY successful college QB who didn't get a shot in the NFL than these guys. Pick a name, I'll support him. It would breed more hope than starting some backup where we hope every single previous game was an aberration and somehow he's a good QB now.

Look at the Bills this year. Win or not, it looks fun and is entertaining.

It "kills me" how the backup steals all hope from an entire organization.
Click to expand...
The problem with carrying a quality backup QB is that they cost a lot of money that could be spent on starters. And the reality is that there aren't even enough quality starting QBs to go around. So if you have a Manning, Brees, or Rodgers it really doesn't make sense to carry an expensive backup. You would be better off spending on better lineman to protect them.
Click to expand...
Expensive, well that's debatable but I see your point. I'm not talking expensive though. This could be any QB off the street that had some college success.

It's that they got a shot and failed several times that bugs me. Move on, get a different backup.

I know I wrote a long shpeal, but the Bills are a great example. I think all three QBs offered some intrigue to the fans this year. They could have dusted off Rob Johnson(well..) and it would feel like some of these teams make ya feel as fans.

I'd rather every single Arena and CFL QB replace an NFL starter over some backup that consistently stinks.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

H
My trade timing is impeccably bad short-term
Replies
25
Views
850
Ilov80s
Ilov80s
rockaction
A Bunch Of Juicy Match-Ups or Studs With Warts
Replies
26
Views
748
rockaction
rockaction
T
Travdogg's positional rankings from week 6 onward
Replies
45
Views
2K
Judge Smails
Judge Smails

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top